Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
101–110 of 507 posts
Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
#102Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
#103flock is the most heinous reflection of the ills of our current socioeconomic structure. absolutely nobody should be okay with mass surveillance, much less mass surveillance enabled by a private company.
It's what happens when we rank private property over human lives. We deserve this.
If you find yourself sympathetic to Flock, you should ask yourself: do we have a right to any kind of privacy in a public space or is public space by definition a denial of any sort of privacy? This is the inherent premise in this technology that's problematic.
In Japan, for instance, there are very strict laws about broadcasting people's faces in public because there is a cultural assumption that one deserves anonymity as a form of privacy, regardless of the public visibility of their person.
I think I'd prefer to live in a place where I have some sort of recourse over when and how I'm recorded. Something more than "avoid that public intersection if you don't like it."
Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
#104Yes, they should be secured so they can only be accessed by law enforcement. But if your spouse/SO/sister/mother/girlfriend/whatever was assaulted while jogging in a park that had Flock cameras, and it allowed law enforcement to quickly identify, track, apprehend and charge the criminal, you'd absolutely be grateful for the technology. There's nothing worse than being told "we don't have any leads" when someone you c…
And what a dumb way to frame it. "Think of the woman" is the same argument as "think of the children". Why not just say if you were attacked you'd want it to be on camera? Afraid it'll make you sound weak? Well, so does bootlicking.
Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
And let me share this reply by Garry Tan, CEO of YC, after someone made a comment that Flock might be _pretty dystopian_ [1][2]: > You're thinking Chinese surveillance > US-based surveillance helps victims and prevents more victims [1] https://x.com/neurajordan/status/1963303084609966288 [2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1963310592615485955
> You're thinking Chinese surveillance the big irony, of course, is that i'm much more comfortable with China surveilling me than the US, since the latter can throw me in jail, seize my assets, and ruin my family's life, while the former cannot.
Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
#106Yes, they should be secured so they can only be accessed by law enforcement. But if your spouse/SO/sister/mother/girlfriend/whatever was assaulted while jogging in a park that had Flock cameras, and it allowed law enforcement to quickly identify, track, apprehend and charge the criminal, you'd absolutely be grateful for the technology. There's nothing worse than being told "we don't have any leads" when someone you c…
Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
And let me share this reply by Garry Tan, CEO of YC, after someone made a comment that Flock might be _pretty dystopian_ [1][2]: > You're thinking Chinese surveillance > US-based surveillance helps victims and prevents more victims [1] https://x.com/neurajordan/status/1963303084609966288 [2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1963310592615485955
I've never heard about this Tan guy before, I don't keep up with politics/corporatism anymore, but is that possibly sarcasm? It sure feels like it to me. But again, I don't know this person, but if I came across that by itself I feel like it's pretty clearly sarcastic, as Twitter tends to be. Maybe I'm just tone deaf myself to how tone deaf others could be?
Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're thinking Chinese surveillance the big irony, of course, is that i'm much more comfortable with China surveilling me than the US, since the latter can throw me in jail, seize my assets, and ruin my family's life, while the former cannot.
The CCP can hijack your accounts and absolutely do all of those things, using your own government.
Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This is clear fascism, but people are too afraid to admit. We have sleep walked into it. >With such surveillance, administration can [...] Have you missed all the cries of "fascism" back in 2016/2017? The problem isn't "people are too afraid to admit". It's that "wolf!" was cried too many times and people tuned it out. Ironically this invocation "fascism" is arguably also crying wolf. From wikipedia: >Fascism is cha…
>Fascism is characterized by support for a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived interest of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy. These things don't just happen overnight. It's not crying wolf when you see the wolf on the horizon running…
So were vaccine mandates and passports "fascism" as well, even though they melted away after the pandemic ended, contrary to some who thought it was going to be part of some new world order?
Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I was 10 years younger, I might agree that they aren't justifying it, but I have enough experience with passive speech to just not let it pass anymore. Regarding remedy, we really need laws on this stuff yesterday. The problem is that we have to gut first amendment freedoms for some of this stuff, which wont go anywhere because there will always be too much overreach with today's representatives.
You should probably read the comment you're replying to before replying > Until there are laws in place that makes people actually responsible for creating these situations, it'll continue, as for a company, profits goes above all. They obviously meant that we ought to be holding these people responsible.
Congrats you spotted the thing we agreed on between comments. If you fail to see the agreement through parity of the part that was echoed, idk what to tell you. Education system is failing everyone in it these days.